If the GOP ever had to pick a single film to represent just how far out of touch the "limousine left" is with its own political base (not to mention the rest of America), they'd be hard-pressed to find a better example than In Time. Superficially, Andrew Niccol's latest bears an eerie similarity to Urinetown, but given its timing and dead-serious tone, one can only read it as a parable directed at the Occupy Wall Street crowd. Like so many civil-rights dramas before it, In Time takes a serious situation with far-reaching consequences and reframes it with Hollywood's richest, most powerful, and most beautiful people as those who are truly oppressed.
As offensive as this film might be to activists, it will be even more so to scientists attempting to make sense of its convoluted logic. Dig this: in the future, everyone stops aging at age 25, and begins to use time as a currency, which is represented by a glowing green timer implanted into their forearms (another visual with some historic ramifications). As with any economy, there are issues of uneven distribution, represented here by different zones, with those in the "ghetto" possessing mere days or even hours at a time and those in the upper echelons possessing centuries.
If the 'ghetto' (a term dropped at every opportunity) were anything like it is depicted here, nobody would ever want to leave. Aside from having the scrappy quality the rural poor tended to have in Frank Capra's work, the people who live there look like Justin Timberlake and Olivia Wilde. Both of them are capable actors, but it's doubtful that Meryl Streep could have convincingly suggested poverty with the kind of hair and skin detail these actors are given here. In fact, it's remarkably similar to that given to Amanda Seyfried and professional weasel Vincent Kartheiser, who are condemned to live a life of nearly complete indulgence for the foreseeable future. If there is one thing (even beyond the time-money conceit) that is immediately implausible about the future here, it's how homogenously beautiful (and white, particularly ridiculous given current demographic projections) and manicured it is; even a minor role at the beginning is given to Matt Bomer, the high cheek-boned actor from White Collar. If it weren't for the constant reminders, one could be forgiven for thinking that this takes place in a classless society.
But then the Robin Hood heroics start, and the sermonizing begins, and In Time becomes unsatisfied with simply re-enacting Titanic and goes to take immediately satisfying action with potentially disastrous consequences. There may not be anyone in America today who doesn't think that there are serious problems with our economic system, but the solutions seemingly proposed by this film's script verge well beyond Marxist and into complete anarchy. Of course, it's not seriously proposing them; one can't really credit too much philosophy to a film whose own stock-in-trade seems to be belabored time puns (Timberlake's protagonist is told at one point that most come "from time"). All of the proceedings are so couched in Hollywood empowerment fantasy that they can't possibly be taken seriously, but they come at a time when they seem to beg to.
Who then, is In Time really for? As an entertainment, it's not without its virtues; it is, after all, slickly produced, efficiently paced, and starring a handsome cast. But it's unlikely that anyone looking for entertainment would want to be so constantly reminded of the economic crisis, nor would anyone looking to examine it be satisfied with such a faultily imagined concept of the future.
SPECIAL FEATURES
The disc contains "The Minutes", about the film's time-based society, some deleted/extended scene, and BD Live.
"In Time" is on sale January 31, 2012 and is rated PG13. Action, Sci-Fi. Written and directed by Andrew Niccol. Starring Amanda Seyfried, Cillian Murphy, Johnny Galecki, Justin Timberlake, Matt Bomer, Olivia Wilde, Vincent Kartheiser.
